Pages:
Author

Topic: Shocking Times: Movement for Pedophile “Rights” Marches On - page 15. (Read 17078 times)

hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 500
Let me fix that for you...

What is the problem with child sex dolls though?
I know it sounds sick but I don't see why it would be bad thing because there is no victim.
So let give rights to necrophiliacs, their victims are not not alive. No harm done?
 Roll Eyes
This is immoral behavior and must not be be encouraged. If you do so you are just one of them.
sr. member
Activity: 308
Merit: 292
★YoBit.Net★ 350+ Coins Exchange & Dice
Is this pedophile thing still going on? Who lets these things happen? Incredible.
hero member
Activity: 840
Merit: 529
A Japanese company produces lifelike child sex dolls - claiming they prevent paedophiles from offending.

Shin Takagi has shipped anatomically-correct sex dolls of girls as young as five to clients around the world for more than a decade.

In an interview with The Atlantic, he described how he set up the Japense company Trottla because of his own attraction to children and his conviction they should be protected.

“We should accept that there is no way to change someone’s fetishes,” Mr Takagi said.

“I am helping people express their desires, legally and ethically. It’s not worth living if you have to live with repressed desire.”.....

Japanese company manufactures lifelike child sex dolls for paedophiles

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/japanese-company-manufactures-lifelike-child-sex-dolls-for-paedophiles-a6811046.html



And so? Now it's bad to have weird fetishes? Oo

Why would you ban this fetish and not BDSM for example?

No surprise that this comes from you. I have always suspected that you had serious issues.

The urge to have sex with a child sex doll is not a fetish. I would call it pedophilia. Normal people don't get sexually aroused by little children, who are four or five years old. But if you get such sexual arousal, then I am afraid that you are a pedophile.

And why should anyone ban BDSM? It is a consensual sexual activity involving adults.

What is the problem with sex dolls though?
I know it sounds sick but I don't see why it would be bad thing because there is no victim.

Nothing bad.
It's the same argument as people explaining that video games make you violent!
Because you'll have sex with a child doll it means you'll rape children!

Meh.
hero member
Activity: 840
Merit: 529
A Japanese company produces lifelike child sex dolls - claiming they prevent paedophiles from offending.

Shin Takagi has shipped anatomically-correct sex dolls of girls as young as five to clients around the world for more than a decade.

In an interview with The Atlantic, he described how he set up the Japense company Trottla because of his own attraction to children and his conviction they should be protected.

“We should accept that there is no way to change someone’s fetishes,” Mr Takagi said.

“I am helping people express their desires, legally and ethically. It’s not worth living if you have to live with repressed desire.”.....

Japanese company manufactures lifelike child sex dolls for paedophiles

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/japanese-company-manufactures-lifelike-child-sex-dolls-for-paedophiles-a6811046.html



And so? Now it's bad to have weird fetishes? Oo

Why would you ban this fetish and not BDSM for example?

No surprise that this comes from you. I have always suspected that you had serious issues.

The urge to have sex with a child sex doll is not a fetish. I would call it pedophilia. Normal people don't get sexually aroused by little children, who are four or five years old. But if you get such sexual arousal, then I am afraid that you are a pedophile.

And why should anyone ban BDSM? It is a consensual sexual activity involving adults.

Cause having sex with a child doll isn't consensual sex? Cause you're raping yourself? xD
legendary
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000
A Japanese company produces lifelike child sex dolls - claiming they prevent paedophiles from offending.

Shin Takagi has shipped anatomically-correct sex dolls of girls as young as five to clients around the world for more than a decade.

In an interview with The Atlantic, he described how he set up the Japense company Trottla because of his own attraction to children and his conviction they should be protected.

“We should accept that there is no way to change someone’s fetishes,” Mr Takagi said.

“I am helping people express their desires, legally and ethically. It’s not worth living if you have to live with repressed desire.”.....

Japanese company manufactures lifelike child sex dolls for paedophiles

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/japanese-company-manufactures-lifelike-child-sex-dolls-for-paedophiles-a6811046.html



And so? Now it's bad to have weird fetishes? Oo

Why would you ban this fetish and not BDSM for example?

No surprise that this comes from you. I have always suspected that you had serious issues.

The urge to have sex with a child sex doll is not a fetish. I would call it pedophilia. Normal people don't get sexually aroused by little children, who are four or five years old. But if you get such sexual arousal, then I am afraid that you are a pedophile.

And why should anyone ban BDSM? It is a consensual sexual activity involving adults.

What is the problem with sex dolls though?
I know it sounds sick but I don't see why it would be bad thing because there is no victim.

Let me fix that for you...

What is the problem with child sex dolls though?
I know it sounds sick but I don't see why it would be bad thing because there is no victim.

Yeah, so who is the victim when someone fucks small child looking sex doll?
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
A Japanese company produces lifelike child sex dolls - claiming they prevent paedophiles from offending.

Shin Takagi has shipped anatomically-correct sex dolls of girls as young as five to clients around the world for more than a decade.

In an interview with The Atlantic, he described how he set up the Japense company Trottla because of his own attraction to children and his conviction they should be protected.

“We should accept that there is no way to change someone’s fetishes,” Mr Takagi said.

“I am helping people express their desires, legally and ethically. It’s not worth living if you have to live with repressed desire.”.....

Japanese company manufactures lifelike child sex dolls for paedophiles

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/japanese-company-manufactures-lifelike-child-sex-dolls-for-paedophiles-a6811046.html



And so? Now it's bad to have weird fetishes? Oo

Why would you ban this fetish and not BDSM for example?

No surprise that this comes from you. I have always suspected that you had serious issues.

The urge to have sex with a child sex doll is not a fetish. I would call it pedophilia. Normal people don't get sexually aroused by little children, who are four or five years old. But if you get such sexual arousal, then I am afraid that you are a pedophile.

And why should anyone ban BDSM? It is a consensual sexual activity involving adults.

What is the problem with sex dolls though?
I know it sounds sick but I don't see why it would be bad thing because there is no victim.

Let me fix that for you...

What is the problem with child sex dolls though?
I know it sounds sick but I don't see why it would be bad thing because there is no victim.
legendary
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000
A Japanese company produces lifelike child sex dolls - claiming they prevent paedophiles from offending.

Shin Takagi has shipped anatomically-correct sex dolls of girls as young as five to clients around the world for more than a decade.

In an interview with The Atlantic, he described how he set up the Japense company Trottla because of his own attraction to children and his conviction they should be protected.

“We should accept that there is no way to change someone’s fetishes,” Mr Takagi said.

“I am helping people express their desires, legally and ethically. It’s not worth living if you have to live with repressed desire.”.....

Japanese company manufactures lifelike child sex dolls for paedophiles

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/japanese-company-manufactures-lifelike-child-sex-dolls-for-paedophiles-a6811046.html



And so? Now it's bad to have weird fetishes? Oo

Why would you ban this fetish and not BDSM for example?

No surprise that this comes from you. I have always suspected that you had serious issues.

The urge to have sex with a child sex doll is not a fetish. I would call it pedophilia. Normal people don't get sexually aroused by little children, who are four or five years old. But if you get such sexual arousal, then I am afraid that you are a pedophile.

And why should anyone ban BDSM? It is a consensual sexual activity involving adults.

What is the problem with sex dolls though?
I know it sounds sick but I don't see why it would be bad thing because there is no victim.
legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1217
A Japanese company produces lifelike child sex dolls - claiming they prevent paedophiles from offending.

Shin Takagi has shipped anatomically-correct sex dolls of girls as young as five to clients around the world for more than a decade.

In an interview with The Atlantic, he described how he set up the Japense company Trottla because of his own attraction to children and his conviction they should be protected.

“We should accept that there is no way to change someone’s fetishes,” Mr Takagi said.

“I am helping people express their desires, legally and ethically. It’s not worth living if you have to live with repressed desire.”.....

Japanese company manufactures lifelike child sex dolls for paedophiles

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/japanese-company-manufactures-lifelike-child-sex-dolls-for-paedophiles-a6811046.html



And so? Now it's bad to have weird fetishes? Oo

Why would you ban this fetish and not BDSM for example?

No surprise that this comes from you. I have always suspected that you had serious issues.

The urge to have sex with a child sex doll is not a fetish. I would call it pedophilia. Normal people don't get sexually aroused by little children, who are four or five years old. But if you get such sexual arousal, then I am afraid that you are a pedophile.

And why should anyone ban BDSM? It is a consensual sexual activity involving adults.
sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 252
A Japanese company produces lifelike child sex dolls - claiming they prevent paedophiles from offending.

Shin Takagi has shipped anatomically-correct sex dolls of girls as young as five to clients around the world for more than a decade.

In an interview with The Atlantic, he described how he set up the Japense company Trottla because of his own attraction to children and his conviction they should be protected.

“We should accept that there is no way to change someone’s fetishes,” Mr Takagi said.

“I am helping people express their desires, legally and ethically. It’s not worth living if you have to live with repressed desire.”.....

Japanese company manufactures lifelike child sex dolls for paedophiles

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/japanese-company-manufactures-lifelike-child-sex-dolls-for-paedophiles-a6811046.html



And so? Now it's bad to have weird fetishes? Oo

Why would you ban this fetish and not BDSM for example?
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
A Japanese company produces lifelike child sex dolls - claiming they prevent paedophiles from offending.

Shin Takagi has shipped anatomically-correct sex dolls of girls as young as five to clients around the world for more than a decade.

In an interview with The Atlantic, he described how he set up the Japense company Trottla because of his own attraction to children and his conviction they should be protected.

“We should accept that there is no way to change someone’s fetishes,” Mr Takagi said.

“I am helping people express their desires, legally and ethically. It’s not worth living if you have to live with repressed desire.”.....

Japanese company manufactures lifelike child sex dolls for paedophiles

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/japanese-company-manufactures-lifelike-child-sex-dolls-for-paedophiles-a6811046.html

sr. member
Activity: 476
Merit: 252
It´s a process. It didn´t start around last christmas. That´s why they call it History. It´s an endless row of happenings where one thing leads to another and so on. There are causes and effects and consequences and all sorts of results. The past leads to the present which is probably why so many people try to avoid figuring in the former. It´s indoctrination that they get from somewhere.

Don't understand your comment...

How about Shocking Times: Movement for Pedophile “Rights” Marches On Do you understand that at all?

Jul 2014 = "Marches on" = Right now = Not old news is the post next to my post. Any bells ring yet?

Dude how do you even want this "movement" to go on?
In which world could it go on? Stop trying to freak every one ^^
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
It´s a process. It didn´t start around last christmas. That´s why they call it History. It´s an endless row of happenings where one thing leads to another and so on. There are causes and effects and consequences and all sorts of results. The past leads to the present which is probably why so many people try to avoid figuring in the former. It´s indoctrination that they get from somewhere.

Don't understand your comment...

How about Shocking Times: Movement for Pedophile “Rights” Marches On Do you understand that at all?

Jul 2014 = "Marches on" = Right now = Not old news is the post next to my post. Any bells ring yet?
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 500
Join @Bountycloud for the best bounties!
It´s a process. It didn´t start around last christmas. That´s why they call it History. It´s an endless row of happenings where one thing leads to another and so on. There are causes and effects and consequences and all sorts of results. The past leads to the present which is probably why so many people try to avoid figuring in the former. It´s indoctrination that they get from somewhere.

Don't understand your comment...
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
It´s a process. It didn´t start around last christmas. That´s why they call it History. It´s an endless row of happenings where one thing leads to another and so on. There are causes and effects and consequences and all sorts of results. The past leads to the present which is probably why so many people try to avoid figuring in the former. It´s indoctrination that they get from somewhere.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
'Paedophilia is natural and normal for males'

How some university academics make the case for paedophiles at summer conferences


By Andrew Gilligan 9:10PM BST 05 Jul 2014
"Paedophilic interest is natural and normal for human males,” said the presentation. “At least a sizeable minority of normal males would like to have sex with children … Normal males are aroused by children.”
Some yellowing tract from the Seventies or early Eighties, era of abusive celebrities and the infamous PIE, the Paedophile Information Exchange? No. Anonymous commenters on some underground website? No again.
The statement that paedophilia is “natural and normal” was made not three decades ago but last July. It was made not in private but as one of the central claims of an academic presentation delivered, at the invitation of the organisers, to many of the key experts in the field at a conference held by the University of Cambridge.
Other presentations included “Liberating the paedophile: a discursive analysis,” and “Danger and difference: the stakes of hebephilia.”
Hebephilia is the sexual preference for children in early puberty, typically 11 to 14-year-olds.

Related Articles
We will provide enough police for historic child abuse criminal investigation, says Nick Clegg 06 Jul 2014
Home Office to publish review into links with Paedophile Information Exchange within weeks 07 Jul 2014
Westminster 'paedophile ring': now where does the investigation go? 15 Nov 2014
Anonymous hackers turn fire on global paedophile menace 23 Jan 2015
Rolf Harris: Footage emerges of him joking with Jimmy Savile 01 Jul 2014
Jimmy Savile: pressure grows for full inquiry into historic child abuse 29 Jun 2014

Another attendee, and enthusiastic participant from the floor, was one Tom O’Carroll, a multiple child sex offender, long-time campaigner for the legalisation of sex with children and former head of the Paedophile Information Exchange. “Wonderful!” he wrote on his blog afterwards. “It was a rare few days when I could feel relatively popular!”
Last week, after the conviction of Rolf Harris, the report into Jimmy Savile and claims of an establishment cover-up to protect a sex-offending minister in Margaret Thatcher’s Cabinet, Britain went into a convulsion of anxiety about child abuse in the Eighties. But unnoticed amid the furore is a much more current threat: attempts, right now, in parts of the academic establishment to push the boundaries on the acceptability of child sex.


Jimmy Savile exploited the trust of a nation for his own vile purposes
A key factor in what happened all those decades ago in the dressing rooms of the BBC, the wards of the NHS and, allegedly, the corridors of power was not just institutional failings or establishment “conspiracies”, but a climate of far greater intellectual tolerance of practices that horrify today.
With the Pill, the legalisation of homosexuality and shrinking taboos against premarital sex, the Seventies was an era of quite sudden sexual emancipation. Many liberals, of course, saw through PIE’s cynical rhetoric of “child lib”. But to others on the Left, sex by or with children was just another repressive boundary to be swept away – and some of the most important backing came from academia.
In 1981, a respectable publisher, Batsford, published Perspectives on Paedophilia, edited by Brian Taylor, a sociology lecturer at Sussex University, to challenge what Dr Taylor’s introduction called the “prejudice” against child sex. Disturbingly, the book was aimed at “social workers, community workers, probation officers and child care workers”.

The public, wrote Dr Taylor, “generally thinks of paedophiles as sick or evil men who lurk around school playgrounds in the hope of attempting unspecified beastliness with unsuspecting innocent children”. That, he reassured readers, was merely a “stereotype”, both “inaccurate and unhelpful”, which flew in the face of the “empirical realities of paedophile behaviour”. Why, most adult-child sexual relationships occurred in the family!
The perspectives of most, though not all, the contributors, appeared strongly pro-paedophile. At least two were members of PIE and at least one, Peter Righton, (who was, incredibly, director of education at the National Institute for Social Work) was later convicted of child sex crimes. But from the viewpoint of today, the fascinating thing about Perspectives on Paedophilia is that at least two of its contributors are still academically active and influential.

Prof Ken Plummer, left, and former PIE head Tom O'Carroll
Ken Plummer is emeritus professor of sociology at Essex University, where he has an office and teaches courses, the most recent scheduled for last month. “The isolation, secrecy, guilt and anguish of many paedophiles,” he wrote in Perspectives on Paedophilia, “are not intrinsic to the phenomen[on] but are derived from the extreme social repression placed on minorities …

“Paedophiles are told they are the seducers and rapists of children; they know their experiences are often loving and tender ones. They are told that children are pure and innocent, devoid of sexuality; they know both from their own experiences of childhood and from the children they meet that this is not the case.”
As recently as 2012, Prof Plummer published on his personal blog a chapter he wrote in another book, Male Intergenerational Intimacy, in 1991. “As homosexuality has become slightly less open to sustained moral panic, the new pariah of 'child molester’ has become the latest folk devil,” he wrote. “Many adult paedophiles say that boys actively seek out sex partners … 'childhood’ itself is not a biological given but an historically produced social object.”

Prof Plummer confirmed to The Sunday Telegraph that he had been a member of PIE in order to “facilitate” his research. He said: “I would never want any of my work to be used as a rationale for doing 'bad things’ – and I regard all coercive, abusive, exploitative sexuality as a 'bad thing’. I am sorry if it has impacted anyone negatively this way, or if it has encouraged this.” However, he did not answer when asked if he still held the views he expressed in the Eighties and Nineties. A spokesman for Essex University claimed Prof Plummer’s work “did not express support for paedophilia” and cited the university’s charter which gave academic staff “freedom within the law to put forward controversial and unpopular opinions without placing themselves in jeopardy”.
Graham Powell is one of the country’s most distinguished psychologists, a past president of the British Psychological Society and a current provider of psychology support services to the Serious Organised Crime Agency, the National Crime Squad, the Metropolitan Police, Kent Police, Essex Police and the Internet Watch Foundation.

In Perspectives on Paedophilia, however, he co-authored a chapter which stated: “In the public mind, paedophile attention is generally assumed to be traumatic and to have lasting and wholly deleterious consequences for the victim. The evidence that we have considered here does not support this view … we need to ask not why are the effects of paedophile action so large, but why so small.”
The chapter does admit that there were “methodological problems” with the studies the authors relied on which “leave our conclusions somewhat muted”. Dr Powell told The Sunday Telegraph last week that “what I wrote was completely wrong and it is a matter of deep regret that it could in any way have made things more difficult [for victims]”. He said: “The literature [scientific evidence] was so poor in 1981, people just didn’t realise what was going on. There was a lack of understanding at the academic level.” Dr Powell said he had never been a member of PIE.

In other academic quarters, with rather fewer excuses, that lack of understanding appears to be reasserting itself. The Cambridge University conference, on July 4-5 last year, was about the classification of sexuality in the DSM, a standard international psychiatric manual used by the police and courts.
After a fierce battle in the American Psychiatric Association (APA), which produces it, a proposal to include hebephilia as a disorder in the new edition of the manual has been defeated. The proposal arose because puberty in children has started ever earlier in recent decades and as a result, it was argued, the current definition of paedophilia – pre-pubertal sexual attraction – missed out too many young people.
Ray Blanchard, professor of psychiatry at the University of Toronto, who led the APA’s working group on the subject, said that unless some other way was found of encompassing hebephilia in the new manual, that was “tantamount to stating that the APA’s official position is that the sexual preference for early pubertal children is normal”.

Prof Blanchard was in turn criticised by a speaker at the Cambridge conference, Patrick Singy, of Union College, New York, who said hebephilia would be abused as a diagnosis to detain sex offenders as “mentally ill” under US “sexually violent predator” laws even after they had completed their sentences.
But perhaps the most controversial presentation of all was by Philip Tromovitch, a professor at Doshisha University in Japan, who stated in a presentation on the “prevalence of paedophilia” that the “majority of men are probably paedophiles and hebephiles” and that “paedophilic interest is normal and natural in human males”.
O’Carroll, the former PIE leader, was thrilled, and described on his blog how he joined Prof Tromovitch and a colleague for drinks after the conference. “The conversation flowed most agreeably, along with the drinks and the beautiful River Cam,” he said.

It’s fair to say the Tromovitch view does not represent majority academic opinion. It’s likely, too, that some of the academic protests against the “stigmatisation” of paedophiles are as much a backlash against the harshness of sex offender laws as anything else. Finally, of course, academic inquiry is supposed to question conventional wisdom and to deal rigorously with the evidence, whether or not the conclusions it leads you to are popular.
Even so, there really is now no shortage of evidence about the harm done by child abuse. In the latest frenzy about the crimes of the past, it’s worth watching whether we could, in the future, go back to the intellectual climate which allowed them.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/10948796/Paedophilia-is-natural-and-normal-for-males.html
hero member
Activity: 840
Merit: 529
Ok so regardeless of what it is, what rights are they/it/whatever trying to get?

Just that love between children and adults can be recognized as a normal thing. It's dumb as hell it won't happen never ever
legendary
Activity: 1274
Merit: 1000
Ok so regardeless of what it is, what rights are they/it/whatever trying to get?
legendary
Activity: 3766
Merit: 1217
Children as a disposable commodity. Sick.
Obvious how clear what nambla members are pushing for, and strange how oblivious the gay lobby was (is?) regarding their objective.
... Or this is what some want us to believe.

The liberal media would like to paint a picture of homosexuals viciously opposing the pedophiles. But the reality is just the opposite. There is a strong connection between homosexuality and pedophilia. Most of the homosexual relations occur between partners with very large age-differences, say a 50 year old male with another 15-year old boy. References to underage children are the norm in Homosexual erotic works. Even most of the rapes committed by the homosexuals involve children less than 15-years of age.
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001
minds.com/Wilikon
What rights are they trying to get with this movement?

None. It's not even a real movement...

This whole theard is just troll then or what?

More or less. That's an old thing that has neither power nor follower.
It's a bit like a strange secte, not dangerous cause too bizarre and small.

You clearly can't call that a movement!


Nambla is not a movement yet they do have demands.



We want girls!
Damn.
I mean boys! Yeah, that's it! (stupid mistake, so ashamed)


Children as a disposable commodity. Sick.

Obvious how clear what nambla members are pushing for, and strange how oblivious the gay lobby was (is?) regarding their objective.

... Or this is what some want us to believe.


Pages:
Jump to: